Task 9.1: Recommendations

The Task 9.1: Recommendations summarizes the recommended

outcomes of the study. The recommendations are categorized by

timeline: ongoing, short-term, and long-term.

The short-term transit recommendation is to overlay limited-stop bus

service (i.e., FastLink) between the Orlando International Airport (OIA)

and the Altamonte Springs SunRail station (“SunRail”). The existing

Link 436S is recommended to be extended north to the SunRail station

to match the alignment of the limited-stop bus service.

The long-term transit recommendation is to implement Bus Rapid

Transit (BRT) between OIA and SunRail. The BRT would operate on a

combination of runningways including mixed-traffic and dedicated

lanes, depending on each roadway segment’s context. BRT stations

would be substantial and have features and amenities to make waiting

more comfortable and speed up boarding and alighting.

Other recommendations related to safety, infrastructure, operations,

and land use will support and leverage the proposed transit solutions.

Background ..................................................................... 3

1 Ongoing .................................................................... 5

2 Short-term ................................................................ 9

3 Long-term ............................................................... 21

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Background

2

List of Figures

Figure 1: Summary of Recommendations ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2: Buffered Bicycle Lane ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Figure 3: Bicycling Facility by Volume and Speed ......................................................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 4: Neighborhood Bicycle Route .......................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 5: Example of Shaded Sidewalks along Major Arterial ....................................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 6: Candidate Locations for RCUTs ..................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Figure 7: Proposed RCUT south of Curry Ford Road .................................................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 8 High Visibility Crosswalk Enforcement has been used by Best Foot Forward to realize a 32% increase in driver yield rates ..................... 10 Figure 9 presents a mock-up of what the updated signage could look like.Figure 9: Mock-up of Current and Proposed OIA Signage ..................... 13 Figure 10: Example of Health Marketing Materials from SR 50 BRT .......................................................................................................................... 17 Figure 11: Example Station Art from Denver RTD Art-n-Transit .................................................................................................................................. 18 Figure 12 Valley Metro (Phoenix, AZ) .......................................................................................................................................................................... 24 Figure 13: Example of Swale Drainage on SR 436 ..................................................................................................................................................... 24 Figure 14: Local Example of Enhanced Network Connectivity .................................................................................................................................... 25

List of Tables

Table 1: Recommendation Categories .......................................................................................................................................................................... 3

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Background

3

Background

This Task 9.1: Recommendations report summarizes the

recommended outcomes of the study. Other reports from this study

are available through this page: lynxsr436.com/updates/documents/.

Each recommendation is categorized by focus area, given a target

timeline, and will be led by a “champion”—as described below.

• Focus Area: The recommendations are associated with one

or more categories that relate to the project’s goals.1

• Timeline: The recommendations are categorized by target

implementation timeline: ongoing, short-term, and long-term.

Ongoing actions are activities already being carried out by

various agencies and can be refined/aligned with SR 436

transit initiative. Short-term recommendations are those that

can be started now. Long-term recommendations are those

that could be achieved by the target opening date for the

transit project (i.e., 2025 or beyond).

• Champion: Most projects—transit and otherwise—require a

devoted champion to go from idea to construction.

Champions buy into the vision, understand the pieces

needed, rally support, and lead a team that gets things done.

Each recommendation in this report is assigned to an

agency that the study team believes is in the best position to

carry the recommendation toward completion. The champion

agency should identify its lead individual(s) and coordinate

with supporting organizations.

Table 1 presents the different focus areas of the recommendations

and Figure 1 summarizes the recommendations by timeline.

1 Note that “Health” recommendations were derived through the study’s Health Impact Assessment (HIA) portion. These recommendations cover a broad range of topics related to healthy

Table 1: Recommendation Focus Area

Icon Focus Area

Transit

Pedestrian and bicyclist

Roadways and intersections

Network

Land use

Health

communities. More details on health-specific recommendations are included in the Task 11: Heath Impact Assessment report.

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Background

4

Figure 1: Summary of Recommendations

Ongoing

Short-term

Long-term

SunRail o Uses stations, not “stops” o Runs on SR 436 o Serves high-ridership locations

& community destinations o Uses a combination of

runningways o Seamless transit connections at

OIA • Build a BRT system • Secure funding for premium transit • Convert swale drainage to curb-and-

gutter • Expand network connectivity • Perform more access management • Advance transit supportive

development

• Implement limited-stop bus from OIA to SunRail

• Reduce vehicular speeding • Conduct pedestrian/bicycling safety

education and enforcement • Implement pedestrian-friendly signal timing • Protect left-turns • Optimize travel on alternative facilities

through TSM&O (Transportation System Management and Operations) strategies

• Update signage at OIA • Implement TSP (Transit Signal priority) and

queue jumps • Form a SR 436 Action Group • Market health benefits of transit • Engage community to champion transit • Preserve affordable housing • Advance transit supportive development

• Enhance sidewalks on SR 436 • Enhance surrounding

pedestrian/bicycling network • Improve streetscape and lighting • Increase crossing locations

• Implement Bus Rapid Transit from OIA to SunRail

o Uses stations, not “stops” o Runs on SR 436 o Serves high-ridership locations &

community destinations o Uses a combination of runningways o Have seamless transit connections at

OIA • Build a BRT system • Secure funding for premium transit • Convert swale drainage to curb-and-gutter • Expand roadway network connectivity • Implement more access management

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Ongoing

5

1 Ongoing

There are several efforts currently ongoing on SR 436 which align

with the outcomes of this study. Most of these efforts are part of the

“Safer Semoran” study being conducted by FDOT District Five from

OIA to Aloma Avenue. By including them as recommendations, the

study team recognizes these current efforts and encourages

stakeholders to continue their implementation throughout the study

area.

1.1 Enhance sidewalks on SR 436

Category Timeline Champion

Ongoing

Widening existing sidewalks to 10-12 feet will better accommodate

pedestrians and bicyclists currently using them. Due to the speed

and volume of vehicular traffic on SR 436, off-road and separated

bicycling facilities are more appropriate over on-road facilities.

Wide sidewalks (10 feet wide minimum, 12 feet or wider is ideal) could serve as an appropriate alternative to trails or shared use paths. Having adequate facilities on both sides of the road is critical to a comfortable pedestrian and bicycling experience. Where widening to 10-12 feet would necessitate right-of-way acquisition, it is recommended that an interim solution to maximize clear space by removing obstacles on existing sidewalks be pursued. Local municipalities should also work to secure easements from private properties to widen sidewalk as part of development processes.

At transit stations and surrounding areas, pedestrian and bicyclist infrastructure should be especially safe, comfortable, and pleasant to use. This may require additional sidewalk width to accommodate station amenities, boarding and alighting space, and more. If necessary, targeted right-of-way acquisitions at station areas are

recommended to ensure sufficient space for transit and sidewalk users.

With regard to existing on-road bicycling lanes, it is recommended that they be maintained to accommodate bicyclists who are comfortable riding on the road. However, they should be widened and buffered from travel lanes. The buffers could be painted strips of a minimum width of 2', per the FDOT Design Manual (FDM) and FHWA Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide.

Figure 2: Buffered Bicycle Lane

Buffers from bike lane can be with or without vertical elements such as Zicla's Zebra. The City of West Palm Beach has considered these separators on Lake Avenue. (Source: Zicla)

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Ongoing

6

1.2 Enhance surrounding ped/bike network

Category Timeline Champion

Ongoing Municipalities

Beyond improving the pedestrian and bicyclist experience on

SR 436, the study team recommends enhancing pedestrian and

bicycling facilities on the surrounding network of cross-streets and

parallel facilities.

The level of investment on surrounding roadways should reflect

existing or planned pedestrian and bicycling activity, which is

generally driven by the density and mix of development. At a

minimum, adequate sidewalks should be provided on both sides of

the road. Bicycling facilities should vary according to the

characteristics of each roadway. Figure 3 illustrates the various types

of bicycle facilities and where they are appropriate based on

vehicular speeds and volumes. This can be used as a starting point

to select comfortable bicycling facilities.

As mentioned in §1.1, widening sidewalks on some sections of

SR 436 would require extensive right-of-way acquisition that may not

be immediately feasible. This is most evident on the section between

Curry Ford Road and SR 50. To address the needs in the short-term,

it is recommended that a neighborhood bicycle route (also known as

a bike boulevard) be established using local roads. Figure 4

illustrates a potential alignment of the neighborhood bicycle route.

The study team recognizes that many bicyclists who would use the

neighborhood route will ultimately access the many destinations

along this section of SR 436. Because of this, the neighborhood

bicycle route likely entails out-of-direction travel for bicyclists. The

recommendation from §1.1 to provide comfortable off-road bicycling

facilities on SR 436 still holds, but the neighborhood bicycle route

could provide a low-stress alternative while right-of-way and

easements for sidewalk widening are being secured.

Figure 3: Bicycling Facility by Volume and Speed

Source: Montgomery County

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Ongoing

7

1.3 Improve streetscape and lighting

Category Timeline Champion

Ongoing

Better streetscape and lighting will make SR 436 more aesthetically

pleasing and—more importantly—will improve the safety and

security of all users.

• Appropriate lighting for pedestrians should be provided at

all intersections, crossing locations, transit stops, and

sidewalks.

• The concepts of Crime Prevention through Environmental

Design (CPTED) should be considered when designing

streetscape and lighting around transit stations.

• Shaded paths to and from transit stations will make the

Central Florida heat and humidity more bearable. Figure 5

shows an example of a shaded sidewalk along a wide

suburban arterial.

Figure 5: Example of Shaded Sidewalks along Major Arterial

Source: Arlington, Virginia

Figure 4: Neighborhood Bicycle Route

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Ongoing

8

1.4 Increase crossing locations

Category Timeline Champion

Ongoing

SR 436’s wide cross-section (up to 260 feet in some locations), fast

moving traffic, and high volumes pose a barrier to walking and

bicycling connectivity. For transit to reach a larger walk and bicycling

shed, SR 436 needs to more of a seam than a barrier, and have an

increased number of protected crossing locations. A successful

transit service will in turn result in more pedestrian and bicycling

activity along and across SR 436. Providing active transportation

users with more crossing locations will reduce out-of-direction travel

and encourage pedestrians and bicyclists to use protected crossing

locations.

Due to the roadway width and the volume and speed of vehicular

traffic on SR 436, crossing locations must be signalized. There are

several types of signalization that may work on SR 436:

• Full signalization (conventional traffic light)

• Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT)

• Median U-Turn (MUT)

FDOT District Five is currently designing an RCUT intersection just

south of Curry Ford Road. Figure 7 illustrates the RCUT design.

Figure 6 presents additional candidate locations, chosen based on

preliminary demand data and proximity to identified station locations.

Figure 6: Candidate Locations for RCUTs

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Short-term

9

2 Short-term

2.1 Reduce speeding

Category Timeline Champion

Short-term

Speeding is related to more severe crashes and more hostile walking

and bicycling experience. A spot speed study conducted by FDOT

District Five in September 2016 found that 85th percentile speeds at

nine survey locations along SR 436 between SR 528 and SR 50

varied from 45 mph to 54 mph during weekday daytime hours. The

posted speeds through this section are 45-50 mph.

Reducing speeding requires comprehensive solutions that integrate

engineering, education, and enforcement. On the engineering side,

several treatments have been shown to reduce speeding:

• Reducing vehicular lane widths to 10-11 feet from the

existing 11-12 feet. This would also shorten crossing

distances and free up space for multimodal infrastructure.

• Vertical elements—such as trees and poles—create a visual

effect that encourage motorists to drive at appropriate

speeds. Trees would have the added benefit of providing

shade to pedestrians and bicyclists on the sidewalks.

• Treatments at intersections can also be used to reduce

speeding. On a major arterial like SR 436, these may include

curb extensions, median safety islands, raised crosswalks at

channelized right-turns, and tighter curb radii. These

treatments put pedestrians closer to driver’s field of vision

and encourages motorists to slow down.

In addition to the engineering component, education and

enforcement of existing laws are key in reducing speeding. After

engineering treatments are implemented and education/enforcement

efforts have been consistently applied, FDOT may review and

conduct an engineering evaluation of posted speed limits on SR 436.

The review would be to understand how current posted speeds fit the

context classification of the roadway and what additional design and

traffic operations measures can help reduce driving speeds and

potentially result in an adjustment of posted speeds.

2.2 Conduct ped/bike safety education and

enforcement

Category Timeline Champion

Short-term

Bike/Walk Central Florida and Best Foot Forward are regional

organizations specializing in pedestrian and bicycling safety and

education. This recommendation—derived from discussions with the

Health Impact Assessment Working Group—extends an invitation to

these regional partners to focus on SR 436.

Figure 7: Proposed RCUT south of Curry Ford Road

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Short-term

10

Best Foot Forward and Bike/Walk Central Florida should consider

developing a SR 436-specific marketing strategy around educating

motorists and residents on safe driving, yielding, and crossing

behavior.

Best Foot Forward has implemented high-visibility enforcement on

low- and high-speed roadways throughout the region since 2012

(see Figure 8). This program involves police officers in everyday

clothes crossing the street in a crosswalk. When drivers fail to stop,

putting a pedestrian at risk, they are pulled over and issued a

citation. Since 2012, these efforts have led to a 32% increase in

driver yield rates on roads with speeds 40 mph or higher (2017).

This program could continue to be supported by FDOT and SR 436

law enforcement partners and could be expanded to include more

crosswalk locations along SR 436. In particular, high-visibility

enforcement could be prioritized at high pedestrian fatality crosswalk

locations identified in the FDOT SR 436 Bike and Pedestrian Safety

Studies (i.e., Pershing Avenue, Curry Ford Road, Lake Underhill

Road, Old Cheney Hwy, Century 21 Blvd, Hanging Moss Road, and

SR 426) and future efforts should be focused near BRT station

areas.

The marketing strategy for educating young residents and students

about safe walking and bicycling behavior could focus outreach at

elementary, middle, and high schools in the SR 436 vulnerable

population areas.

These strategies can be modeled after the WalkSafe program in

Miami-Dade County. This program was implemented in a single

high-risk district and was shown to improve the pedestrian safety

knowledge of elementary school children. A before and after

research study was conducted, and the observational data

demonstrated improved crossing behaviors.

Figure 8 High Visibility Crosswalk Enforcement has been used by Best Foot Forward to realize a 32% increase in driver yield rates

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Short-term

11

2.3 Implement pedestrian-friendly signal

timing

Category Timeline Champion

Short-term

Existing signal timing on SR 436 was designed to maximize vehicle

throughput and speeds. Given SR 436’s population density,

documented safety concerns, and concentration of destinations, a

more balanced signal timing strategy is recommended. This

recommendation becomes even more critical with enhancements to

transit service on SR 436.

MetroPlan Orlando manages the regional signal retiming program

which updates signal timing on roughly 20 corridors each year. The

corridors to be retimed are proposed by representatives from

Osceola, Orange, and Seminole Counties each year.

Given MetroPlan Orlando’s overarching goals and their continued

leadership on the signal retiming program, it is recommended that

MetroPlan Orlando carry out this recommendation.

There is no single definition for pedestrian-friendly signal timing, but

it generally includes the items described below:

• Shorter cycle lengths: On SR 436, maximum cycle lengths of

90 to 120 seconds could be a reasonable middle ground

between serving motorists and other modes. Currently, cycle

lengths of 180+ seconds are common. Optimizing splits of signal

phases and coordinating signal progression to better reflect

existing conditions could mitigate some of the impact to auto

delays from reducing cycle lengths.

• Leading pedestrian intervals (LPI): LPIs typically give

pedestrians a 3- to 7-second head start when entering an

intersection with a corresponding green signal in the same

direction of travel. LPIs increase the visibility of pedestrians in

the crosswalk and have been shown to reduce pedestrian-

vehicle collisions as much as 60% (NACTO. 2018)

• Restrict right-turn-on-red: Right-turns on red conflict with

pedestrians and bicyclists using the crosswalk.

• Pedestrian recall where/when appropriate: Where and when

pedestrian volumes are high enough, it is recommended that

pedestrian phases be on recall, meaning that they will come up

automatically without requiring the pedestrian to use the push

button.

• Adaptive walk intervals: Adaptive walk intervals seek to

increase the duration of the “WALK” signal from the minimum

MUTCD requirement of seven seconds. At intersections with

long green phases—common throughout SR 436—more time

could be allocated to the “WALK” signal with little or no impact to

traffic operations. This is a relatively novel strategy that may

require additional research and implementation time.

2.4 Protect left-turns

Category Timeline Champion

Short-term Municipalities

Most left-turn movements from SR 436 are currently protected (i.e.,

motorists may turn only with a green arrow). However, there are

several locations with either unsignalized left-turn movements or with

permitted left-turn phasing at traffic signals. Protecting left turns at

these locations is expected to reduce angle and vehicle-pedestrian

crashes, both of which can be severe under high-speed conditions. A

tragic example occurred in June 2017, when two men were killed by

a motorist making an unsignalized left-turn into the Walmart on

SR 436 near Hanging Moss Road.

Younger and older drivers especially have difficulties interpreting the

sufficient gap distance needed to safely make permissive left turns.

The use of permissive phasing also leaves pedestrians without a

protected walk phase.

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Short-term

12

The recommendation to protect left turns will vary by the existing

condition at each intersection. An engineering study is recommended

to consider crash history, left-turn volumes, through volumes,

number of lanes, and prevalent speeds on SR 436. Protected-only

left-turn phasing should be evaluated at the following locations:

• Where currently signalized with permitted left-turn phasing.

For the reasons stated above, it is recommended that permitted

left-turn phasing be replaced with protected-only left-turn

phasing. This may require the installation of new signal heads.

The cross-street left turn phasing should be evaluated on a case-

by-case basis, with lower volume cross-streets expected to

operate satisfactorily with permitted left-turn phasing.

• Where currently unsignalized. At locations where motorists

can make an unsignalized (uncontrolled) left turn from SR 436,

the recommendation is to install a traffic signal. The type of traffic

signal could vary depending on the conditions at each location.

For example, some locations may warrant a full signal, where

others could be better served by an RCUT or MUT intersection.

Where a traffic signal—of any type—is not justifiable, the

recommendation is to close the unsignalized median access and

direct motorists to a downstream intersection to make a U-turn.

Beyond the expected safety benefits of reducing left-turn crashes,

the protection of left-turns through new signals will have the added

benefit of providing additional controlled crossings for pedestrians

and bicyclists.

2.5 Optimize travel on alternative facilities

through TSMO

Category Timeline Champion

Short-term

As SR 436 shifts from its current role of an automobile thoroughfare

to a street that serves people on different modes, the capacity of the

surrounding roadway network could be fully utilized to accommodate

regional traffic, especially during the peak hours. TSMO strategies

can be coupled with wayfinding and directional signage to optimize

the full use of the area’s transportation network.

• Curry Ford Road is currently underutilized as an alternative to

SR 408 for traffic headed into downtown Orlando. Opportunities

for TSMO strategies such as signal timing and progression

should be explored.

• Conway Road and Goldenrod Road provide north-south

connectivity and have interchanges with SR 408 and SR 528.

TSMO strategies should be explored for these facilities.

• The freeway system offers additional network capacity and

could be a viable alternative for longer-distance trips currently

using SR 436. These may include from OIA to downtown

Orlando or from OIA to Altamonte Springs. Note that both north-

south freeways to the west and east of SR 436 (i.e., I-4 and

SR 417) are already undergoing capacity expansions.

2.6 Update signage at OIA

Category Timeline Champion

Short-term

Updating signage at OIA to better reflect current conditions and user

preferences could result in benefits to OIA travelers and employees,

as well as SR 436 residents and businesses. This strategy could be

led by GOAA.

It is recommended that signage at OIA be updated to direct long-

distance trips to the freeway system. The freeway system offers

competitive travel times that are more reliable than those on the

arterial system. In fact, mobile navigations apps already direct

downtown Orlando-bound traffic to the freeway system.

Instead of suggesting SR 436 as a through route to other regional

destinations, signage at OIA could advertise the Gateway District

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Short-term

13

and its amenities, including hotels, restaurants, and gas stations.

This could generate local trips that interact with the residents and

businesses along SR 436. Figure 9 presents a mock-up of what the

updated signage could look like.

Figure 9: Mock-up of Current and Proposed OIA Signage

2.7 Implement TSP and queue jumps

Category Timeline Champion

Short-term

Transit signal priority (TSP) and queue jumps are strategies that can

result in travel time savings and enhanced reliability for transit users.

When effectively deployed, TSP and queue jumps can realize some

of the benefits of dedicated transit lanes with smaller impacts to

automobile capacity.

• Transit signal priority. The study recommends that TSP be used for all arriving limited-stop (FastLink) or BRT buses. TSP throughout the OIA to SunRail segment is projected to save 5-6 minutes of transit travel time versus existing conditions. TSP would work by extending the green signal or truncating the red signal by 10-15 seconds. Because of (1) the subtle nature of TSP, (2) the modest frequency of arrivals with the recommended 15- to 30-minute headways, and (3) the fact that SR 436 carries more through traffic than most cross-streets, the impact of TSP on intersection traffic operations is projected to be minimal. See the TIA report for more information on the traffic impacts of TSP and queue jumps.

• Queue jumps. Queue jumps or queue bypasses allow the bus operator to skip intersection queues by using the right-turn lane to travel through the intersection. A queue jump relies on a separate bus signal to give the bus a head start, while a queue bypass relies on having a receiving lane to merge back to the through lanes. There are several criteria that can be considered to prioritize queue jump implementation, including intersection geometry, queuing, right-turn volumes, frequency of transit service, and more.

FDOT is already advancing conditional TSP (e.g., only if the bus is running late) on the section of SR 436 being served by LYNX Link 436N. This is part of a regional effort to implement TSP on routes serving SunRail. The recommendation is to continue that

Current

Recommended

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Short-term

14

effort along the portion of SR 436 being served by Link 436S. Once Limited Stop or BRT service is implemented, it is recommended that the conditional TSP be switched to unconditional TSP for all Limited Stop or BRT buses. Local bus service could continue to use conditional TSP.

The following intersections with SR 436 have been identified as potential locations for the implementation of queue jumps based on existing intersection traffic and geometry. Other locations on SR 436 not listed here may also be potential candidates for queue jumps, depending on future conditions and level of infrastructure investments the region will be considering.

• Lee Vista Boulevard

• Hoffner Avenue

• Gatlin Avenue

• Pershing Avenue

• SR 50

• Baldwin Park Street

• SR 426 (Aloma Avenue)

• Montgomery Road

• Hazeltine National Drive

• Boston Avenue

• Altamonte Mall entrance

• Essex Avenue

• Renaissance Center entrance

• Weathersfield Avenue

2.8 Limited-stop bus from OIA to SunRail

Category Timeline Champion

Short-term

The short-term transit alternative is about providing better transit

service on SR 436 now. The execution of this alternative should

avoid “making perfect the enemy of good”. The region should

consider that tweaking the service once it is operational and when

planning for the long-term alternative is always feasible.

2.8.1 Mode

The recommendation for the short-term alternative is limited-stop bus

service. The limited-stop bus service would be overlaid on existing

local service, except with a modification to extend Link 436S such

that it also serves the Altamonte Springs SunRail station—resulting

in a short overlap between the two local routes on SR 436.

2.8.2 Alignment

The recommendation is to run limited-stop bus from OIA to the

Altamonte Springs SunRail station, covering approximately 19 miles.

To reduce out-of-direction travel and delays and to better serve the

many destinations along SR 436, both local and limited-stop buses

should avoid deviating from SR 436 to the extent possible. With

adjustments to stop locations, modifications to signal timing, and

proper wayfinding, passengers transferring to other routes could

walk short distances to another stop. This would enable the bus to

travel in a straighter, faster, and more reliable manner.

Depending on demand and available resources, additional limited-

stop bus service on other sections of SR 436 could be implemented

in the future.

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Short-term

15

2.8.3 Operations

To speed up deployment, LYNX should consider relying on existing:

• FastLink branding

• Fare payment methods

• Traveler information methods

• Buses and shelters

Based on existing and projected ridership, a headway of 30 minutes

would be appropriate to start the new service.

Stops should be based on the station areas identified for the long-

term alternative but may need adjustment if existing shelters are

available elsewhere. The proposed station locations are illustrated in

Figure 10 and viewable here

Unless otherwise determined by the ongoing LYNX Forward (system

redesign effort), the FastLink service should be numbered 412 to

match other FastLink routes. Link 436S should be renumbered as

112 and Link 436N should be renumbered as 113. This would

reinstate consistency with internal LYNX reporting and reduce rider

confusion regarding southbound/northbound vs. southern/northern

segments.

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Short-term

16

Figure 10: Preliminary Station Locations

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Short-term

17

2.8.4 OIA Considerations

LYNX should work with GOAA, SunRail, and Brightline to make bus

access to both OIA terminals and the intermodal facility as seamless

as possible. Bus riders should be able to get on and off at both

terminals (north and south) and comfortably walk to their ticket

counter, gate, or place of employment. LYNX survey data indicates

that approximately one third of LYNX riders getting off the bus at OIA

are air travelers.

2.9 Form a SR 436 Action Group

Category Timeline Champion

Short-term

A SR 436 “Action Group” should be established to carry on the work

of the SR 436 Transit Study Partner Agency Working Group (PAWG)

and HIA Working Group. This group would be responsible for

ensuring that recommendations are implemented, monitored, and

evaluated.

Spearheaded by LYNX, the “Action Group” would be comprised of

key PAWG members such as City of Orlando, City of Casselberry,

Orange County, Seminole County, MetroPlan Orlando, and others. It

could also include neighborhood and business organizations with an

interest in SR 436.

It is recommended that this group meet regularly to coordinate and

track progress on the implementation SR 436 study

recommendations.

2.10 Market health benefits of transit

Category Timeline Champion

Short-term

MetroPlan Orlando could help by increasing awareness of health

outcomes of active transportation. This can involve partnering with

existing health campaigns like Florida Hospital’s Move60 Challenge,

and other local health organizations, schools, and YMCAs in

vulnerable population areas. Health marketing materials can be

tailored to show the health benefits of using transit and active

transportation regularly, as shown in Figure 11.

In support, LYNX could promote transit connections to recreational

opportunities by posting park and recreation maps in LYNX facilities,

vehicles, and website; and posting LYNX bus route maps at corridor

Figure 11: Example of Health Marketing Materials from SR 50 BRT

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Short-term

18

recreational facilities, maps, and websites. Efforts should be focused

on vulnerable population area community destinations including

Barber Park, Demetree Park, Yucatan Park, Secret Lake Park, and

Cranes Roost Park.

2.11 Engage community to champion transit

Category Timeline Champion

Short-term

Over half of the HIA Quality of Life survey participants have

infrequent positive interactions with their community (i.e., less

frequently than two times a month). LYNX has the opportunity to

leverage the new BRT stations to be a venue for positive community

interactions. With that end in mind, stakeholder engagement and

community art play an important role in enhancing the sense of place

for riders.

Transit can be a unifying force in communities by engaging the

community in station design and art installations, interactive station

programming (such as "Adopt a Stop" clean-ups, geocaching near

stations), and social media campaigns (such as #mystop,

#irideLYNX, #LYNXrideday, etc.).

It is recommended that LYNX—through the SR 436 Action Group—

partner with Full Sail University, Gateway Orlando, and Art

Organizations such as United Arts of Central Florida, See Art

Orlando and Creative City Project to collaborate on creative

placemaking opportunities at new BRT stations.

Since 1994, RTD (Denver) has run their “Art-n-Transit” program to

enhance the design, aesthetic quality, and user friendliness of transit

projects, as well as to foster transit-oriented community

development. This program partners with local artists to install

artwork at transit facilities and puts together an “Art-n-Transit”

brochure which provides an artistic self-guided tour on public transit

fully accessible by bus and rail. It educates about art, the transit

system, and instills a sense of community pride and ownership that

has spurred transit use and transit-oriented development. Figure 12

presents an example of artwork installed at a transit station through

the Art-n-Transit program.

Similar efforts have been conducted by Tri-Met in Portland and Tri-

Rail in southeast Florida.

Figure 12: Example Station Art from Denver RTD Art-n-Transit

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Short-term

19

2.12 Preserve affordable housing

Category Timeline Champion

Short-term Municipalities

A potential unintended impact of premium transit implementation is

the displacement of low-income households due to rising land values

in BRT station areas. This is a complicated but not uncommon issue

for land use entities around the country. Fortunately, this issue can

be mitigated with thoughtful policies and strategic programs.

Cities and counties along the SR 436 corridor should work to

preserve existing affordable housing within the corridor, especially in

planned BRT station areas. Strategies with demonstrated success in

this realm are:

1. Transit-oriented development (TOD) mandatory inclusionary

zoning; and

2. Community Land Trusts (CLTs)

3. Incentivizing a larger supply of multi-family housing

Mandatory inclusionary zoning requires developers to set aside a

portion of their development as affordable and can help prevent the

pricing out of local residents. Mandatory inclusionary zoning is

different than voluntary inclusionary zoning where the developer has

the choice to pursue development incentives (such as density

bonuses) and construct affordable housing.

CLTs are non-profit organizations that help provide permanently

affordable housing by maintaining ownership of the land on which

the housing is built. There are many examples of CLTs in Central

Florida such as the Hannibal Square Land Trust in Winter Park.

Finally, housing prices follow the laws of supply and demand. By

encouraging the construction of new multi-family housing around

transit stations (i.e., higher supply), municipalities can play a role in

mitigating the rising land values associated with increased demand.

By doing this, municipalities would also support transit success by

concentrating more people close to high-frequency transit.

2.13 Advance transit supportive development

Category Timeline Champion

Short-term Municipalities

Zoning and land use policies are a critical component to support or

inhibit the potential for the proposed BRT to influence the health

indicators identified by the HIA. Industry best practices for TOD

zoning and land use policies were considered and summarized

below:

LAND USES

• A mix of uses in an area provides for an environment that

promotes walking and allows for a variety of activities to occur

without the need to use an automobile.

• A municipality can encourage healthy outcomes by limiting uses

that are not consistent with healthy communities (e.g., auto-

oriented uses, single-use developments, etc.) while permitting

uses that support a healthy environment (e.g. mixed residential

and commercial uses, farmers markets, urban farms, etc.).

• A well-designed, connected street grid makes local and regional

travel more efficient by providing choice not only in modes, but

also in routes.

SITE DESIGN & LOT LAYOUT REQUIREMENTS

• How and where buildings are sited on a parcel provide the

greatest site design opportunity to support the pedestrian

network.

• The farther a building is set back from the roadway, the more

challenging it is for a pedestrian and transit rider to access

surrounding land uses.

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Short-term

20

• Corridors with large setbacks also encourage higher vehicular

speeds and more hostile walking and bicycling environments.

PARKING REQUIREMENTS

• High minimum parking standards are associated with auto-

oriented uses and do not encourage the use of other modes. In

addition to implementing maximum parking standards, shared

parking policies can also limit the amount of land reserved for

parking, creating a “park-once” and pedestrian-friendlier

environment.

• Regulations that permit buildings to “face” a parking lot can limit

the pedestrian experience. Consideration should be given to side

and rear parking to support more pedestrian-friendly roadways

that have direct access to buildings and “street walls” that add to

pedestrian interest, comfort, and safety.

• On-street parking provides opportunities for a more walkable

street design, as parking provide buffers between traffic and

sidewalks/bike facilities and could encourage slower vehicular

traffic.

VEHICULAR STANDARDS

• Regulating block size and increasing parallel network creates a

walkable pattern that provides for multiple route choices, safe

pedestrian access, and adequate linkages to and from transit

areas.

• Cross access between parcels can create a connected network

of vehicular and pedestrian access that will allow for movement

internal to adjacent sites without needing to access SR 436.

Limiting driveway curb cuts create a more continuous sidewalk

and fewer interruptions to the BRT service.

PEDESTRIAN STANDARDS

• Sidewalk placement and size will affect the pedestrian activity

and access to transit.

• Continuous pedestrian networks within a development or

connections to adjacent developments are important to access a

transit stop.

• Well-lit pedestrian walkways and sidewalks improve pedestrian

safety.

• Landscape buffers and street trees provide shade, comfort, and

buffer from roadways and drive aisles for pedestrians.

BUILDING FEATURES

• The design of a building can provide shelter, visual interest,

safety, and can increase the legibility of the entire pedestrian

network.

• Entryways that face the street, and or the pedestrian connections

contribute to higher walkability.

• Increased building transparency make connections with the

inside of the building (seeing people, various activities, window

shop) with the pedestrians walking on the sidewalk.

• Buildings that front the street (instead of a parking lot) provide

“eyes” on the street and contributes to the visual interest of the

walking environment.

• Visually appealing façade treatments add interest to the walking

and bicycling trip to access transit, and can entice people to walk

or bicycle farther. Building awnings can also provide shelter to

pedestrians.

The cities and counties along SR 436 may incorporate these best

practices and ideas from the HIA demonstration area plans (see HIA

final report) into ongoing discussions and future policy refinements

(such as the Orange Code effort). The cities and counties should

also consider adopting formal station area plans and zoning

overlays.

LYNX should also consider having “TOD coordinators” to actively

promote and coordinate transit-supportive development around

planned premium transit stations.

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Long-term

21

3 Long-term

3.1 Bus Rapid Transit from OIA to SunRail

Category Timeline Champion

Long-term

3.1.1 Mode

Implement a premium transit service using buses and infrastructure

that incorporate elements of an effective Bus Rapid Transit (BRT).

BRT elements thought to be appropriate for SR 436 include, but are

not limited to:

3.1.1.1 A shift from stops to transit stations

Currently, over 40% of LYNX stops on the corridor are simply a pole

in the ground. To provide a premium transit experience, the project

should invest in more substantial station infrastructure including

seating, protection from the elements, and amenities that the riding

public has shown an interest in:

• Ticket vending machines

• Real-time arrival time displays

• Appropriate lighting

• Secure bicycle parking (ideally covered)

• Branding

• Level boarding

• Public art

3.1.1.2 Faster and more reliable travel times

Faster and more reliable travel times could be achieved through a

combination of faster service (less stopping at signals and

congestion), reduced station dwell times, and availability of real-time

bus information to users. These can be achieved through:

• Longer station spacing. Premium bus transit spacing usually varies between 0.5 miles and 1.5 miles. Preliminary station locations have been identified based on boarding data and existing/planned transit connections. See Figure 10 for a list of potential BRT station locations. The exact placement of stations should consider existing and potential pedestrian access and crossing opportunities (see Pedestrian and bicyclist recommendations)

• Bus-only lanes. Exclusive or semi-exclusive bus lanes help buses avoid queuing at intersections and other effects of auto congestion. There are several possibilities for bus-only lanes, ranging from curbside Business Access and Transit (BAT) lanes to median-running exclusive bus lanes. Each option has drawbacks and advantages when the full range of corridor uses and costs are considered. Using a variety of bus-only lane configurations requires the use of dual-sided buses, which are not currently part of the LYNX fleet. Note that on OIA property, SR 436 is a limited-access facility without intersections or recurring congestion, and bus-only lanes are not likely advantageous or necessary there.

• In-lane boarding and alighting. Premium transit buses should mostly stay on their travel lanes when picking up and dropping off passengers, reducing delays associated with merging back onto moving traffic. This requires the construction of bulb-outs or boarding islands. Existing and new bus pull-outs may continue to be used for local bus service.

• Near-level boarding and alighting. Not having to go up and down steps, or to use a bus wheelchair lift/ramp notably reduces the average boarding and alighting time of all passengers. This recommendation is particularly important for passengers with limited mobility.

• Off-board payment. To fully realize the benefits of off-board payment, all passengers should pay for their fares ahead of boarding. There are several ways to implement this, including having ticket vending machines at each station, relying on transit passes or smart cards, or mobile ticketing. Refer to §3.2 for more discussion on this topic.

• All-door boarding and alighting. The combination of off-board payment and near-level boarding and alighting should be

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Long-term

22

leveraged to offer all-door boarding and alighting. This strategy reduces queuing at the bus doors and shortens bus dwell times.

• Bicycles on-board buses. Due to the emphasis on fast boarding and alighting, premium transit buses generally do not have racks in front. Some systems allow bicycles onboard the bus, especially during periods when crowding is not an issue. Note that all stations should have bicycle parking (see §3.1.1.1 recommendations).

• Transit signal priority. TSP that extends the green signal or truncates the red signal by 10-15 seconds for all arriving BRT buses on SR 436 is projected to save 5-6 minutes of transit travel time versus existing conditions. Because of (1) the subtle nature of TSP, (2) the modest frequency of arrivals with the recommended 15-minute headways, and (3) the fact that SR 436 carries more through traffic than most cross-streets, the impact of TSP on intersection traffic operations is projected to be minimal.

BRT elements that are more applicable at a systems level are

described in section §3.2.

3.1.2 Alignment

As a starting point, BRT service should run from OIA to the

Altamonte Springs SunRail station, covering approximately 19 miles.

To reduce out-of-direction travel and delays and to better serve the

many destinations along SR 436, premium transit buses should

avoid deviating from SR 436 to the extent possible.

3.1.3 Operations

The operation of premium transit on SR 436 should reflect a much

higher level of service than existing local service, yet still be

reasonable given the current ridership and characteristics of the

corridor. The operational cost estimates prepared during the study

reflect the following operational parameters during opening year:

• 15-minute headways

• 14-hour spans of service (e.g.,6 AM to 8 PM)

• Seven days a week

3.2 Build a BRT system

Category Timeline Champion

Long-term

Enhancing transit on SR 436 is important to serve existing riders. But

to truly make transit a desirable choice for current non-transit riders,

improvements must extend beyond SR 436. The following

recommendations are proposed to be carried out by LYNX as it sets

to create a BRT system:

• Value proposition. LYNX should engage a marketing firm with

experience or interest in public transportation to develop a value

proposition. A preliminary value proposition has been developed

by the study team and could serve as a starting point: “Simple,

fast, and reliable transportation that will save you thousands”.

• Strong branding and identity. Once the value proposition is

developed, LYNX should work with a marketing firm with

experience or interest in public transportation to develop strong

branding and identity for the new system.

• Premium buses. The buses used for the BRT system should

reinforce the value proposition, branding, and identity associated

with premium service. However, LYNX should carefully review

and select rolling stock based on how well it can perform the

core functions of BRT service—rather than choosing solely on

aesthetics. There are many considerations and decision points

related to rolling stock. It is recommended that LYNX strongly

consider battery-electric buses, as it is doing for LYMMO

vehicles in downtown Orlando. These vehicles are quieter, have

zero tailpipe emissions, and could tie in to the City of Orlando’s

Green Works program and OUC community solar project.

• Traveler information. Although the DoubleMap mobile app

currently used by LYNX is a welcome improvement from having

no real-time traveler information, more work is needed to bring

the traveler information offering to current industry best

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Long-term

23

practices. LYNX should seek to disseminate its data using open

data standards such as GTFS-RT, to reduce latency in the data

feed, to improve or use proven arrival time algorithms, and to

continuously use data and user feedback to improve real-time

traveler information accuracy.

• Off-board payment. To speed up boarding times, LYNX should

develop a strategy for use of off-board payment by all

passengers on the BRT system. In light of evolving technologies,

the strategy should be multifaceted and avoid reliance on a

single technology or vendor. LYNX may consider integrating into

the payment infrastructure already implemented by SunRail (i.e.,

SunCard). Ideally, this would lower the cost of implementation

and result in a tighter and seamless integration from the users’

perspective.

• Fare capping and Mobility as a Service. Off-board payment

capabilities will enable LYNX to explore innovative services such

as fare capping and Mobility as a Service.

• Random proof-of-payment. To get the most out of all-door

boarding and off-board payment, riders must be able to board

the buses without presenting tickets at the door. For a starter

system with relatively low ridership, random proof-of-payment

enforcement is more cost-effective than gate-controlled stations.

In this setup, transit agency staff (e.g., transit police, system

ambassadors, etc.) perform random checks onboard the bus or

upon egress. SunRail already uses random proof-of-payment to

enforce fare collection.

2 Note that sales taxes are considered regressive because they take a larger percentage of income from low-income taxpayers than from

3.3 Secure funding for premium transit

Category Timeline Champion

Long-term All

LYNX must do a lot with limited funds. With one of the largest service

areas in the country and a limited budget, LYNX is one of the most

cost efficient mid-sized transit agencies at roughly $3.30 per trip.

Through the Transit Development Plan (TDP) and Route

Optimization Study (ROS), LYNX is currently evaluating options for

squeezing even more efficiency from the system. At the same time,

LYNX is preparing to meet future service needs through important

expansions and enhancements, such as the SR 436 BRT.

In a typical partnership with the federal government, local or state

jurisdictions cover a portion of the total project cost—a contribution

known as “local match”. See the Funding and Next Steps Memo for

more information on transit funding programs at the state and federal

level.

Currently, there is no transit-specific funding source available to local

agencies to draw the local match from. In fact, out of the

municipalities represented in the PAWG, only Seminole County has

dedicated transportation funding through its 2014 sales tax increase.

Many regions use a dedicated sales tax to fund transit

improvements2. Valley Metro (Phoenix, AZ) is a great example of

how a large metropolitan area with multiple jurisdictions worked

together on funding new transit service (see Figure 13). Each of the

15 cities in the region passed a local tax to support transit in order to

be eligible for service along the region's first premium transit corridor.

Through the efforts of local jurisdictions, Maricopa County voters

approved Proposition 400 extending the 1983 county-wide

high-income taxpayers. To make such taxes less regressive, many states exempt basic necessities such as food from the sales tax.

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Long-term

24

transportation tax. The half-cent sales tax funds the Regional

Transportation Plan, which includes basic transit services. Since

2004, transit receives one-third of the half-cent tax, which is used for

regional bus services and high capacity and premium transit

services. The half-cent sales tax, along with federal matching funds

and other funding sources, is projected to provide $6.6 billion in

public transportation improvements through 2026.

Other potential sources of long-term transit funding that better

support the goals of the project could include:

o Local gas taxes

o Automobile tolling

o Tax-increment financing

o Parking fees

o Ride-hailing surcharges

o Partnerships with developers, major businesses, and

educational institutions along the corridor

Most of these funding streams are now used by midsize and large

cities in the United States.

3.4 Convert swale drainage to curb-and-

gutter

Category Timeline Champion

Long-term

Some sections of SR 436 currently have a “rural” cross section, with

paved shoulders transitioning to open, swale drainage on the sides

of the road. Rural cross sections increase the distance that

pedestrians must travel to cross the road or access a bus stop (see

Figure 14). Furthermore, the wide cross section influences driver

behavior toward higher speeds.

Figure 14: Example of Swale Drainage on SR 436

Figure 13 Valley Metro (Phoenix, AZ)

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Long-term

25

The conversion of rural cross sections to urban cross sections with

curb and gutter is expected to enhance the pedestrian and bicyclist

experience. Due to high cost of fully reconstructing cross sections

and their drainage structures, it is recommended that this treatment

be prioritized at the identified transit stations. In sections where the

recommended transit project requires roadway reconstruction, the

conversion to a curb-and-gutter cross section could potentially be

implemented at the same time.

3.5 Expand network connectivity

Category Timeline Champion

Long-term Municipalities

The SR 436 project can be successful only if riders can easily and

comfortably access the stations through other modes of travel. About

95 percent of LYNX users access transit by foot. All else being

equal, maximizing the reach of a station’s walkshed will increase the

number of people served by transit.

Regulating block size and increasing parallel network creates a

walkable area that provides for safe pedestrian access and adequate

linkages to and from transit corridors.

A well-designed, connected street grid makes travel more efficient by

providing choice not only in modes, but also in routes. A connected

street grid also reduces out-of-direction travel, expanding the reach

of the transit walkshed.

Figure 15 shows a local example where a connected street grid was

retrofitted onto a suburban big-box parking lot. Winter Park Village is

now a community destination with above-average foot traffic and

vibrancy.

Figure 15: Local Example of Enhanced Network Connectivity

Source: Winter Park Village via Google Earth Pro (2018)

SR 436 Transit Corridor Study Long-term

26

3.6 Implement more access management

Category Timeline Champion

Long-term Municipalities

Access management “promotes the efficient and safe movement of

people and goods by reducing conflicts on the roadway system and

at its interface with other modes of travel” (FDOT, 2016). Access

management along the SR 436 study corridor varies significantly—

from limited access on OIA property to frequent access in areas near

Curry Ford Road, SR 50, US 17/92 and others.

The recommendation to perform more access management is

intended to result in more stringent access management with

signalized left-turn access and fewer driveway cuts along SR 436.

This could benefit (a) motorists by reducing conflict points and the

potential for rear-end crashes, (b) transit operators and users by

improving traffic flow on the curbside lanes, and (c) pedestrians and

bicyclists by having fewer driveways and better crossing treatments.

It should be noted that increased access management in this

recommendation does refer to limiting number of signals or cross

streets along SR 436.

It is expected that access management would happen as other

projects are being advanced. These projects may include

reconstruction efforts by FDOT or municipalities, as well as

renovation or redevelopment projects by property owners along

SR 436.

The main items that are recommended to be considered are listed

below.

• Driveway consolidation concentrates access and egress

from a property or a group of properties to one or few

driveways. These driveways can be placed on side streets or

far enough from signalized intersections to allow for easy

access, even during peak periods.

• Cross access between parcels can create a connected

network of vehicular and pedestrian access that will allow for

movement internal to adjacent sites without needing to use

SR 436.

• Sidewalk priority across driveways means that sidewalks

are built as flat as practically possible, with clear signage

and marking reinforcing that the sidewalk user has priority

over vehicles turning into or out of the driveway.